It is what it is, but god bless stupid americans that keep blood sucking lawyers in business. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Ok let's see.... no one got hurt.... no one died.... and yet they are trying to get a bunch of money from AS. Not to say it wouldn't have been freaky, but good gravy - do you really need a bunch of money for this?!?! I know someone is going to come back with the whole "punative" argument - that the passengers are just trying to make sure AS gets "punished" so it won't happen to anyone else. Bull crap. They are just a bunch of lazies after free money like far too many of my fellow Americans today. Some guy on the highway almost ran into me yesterday. It freaked me out pretty bad. Can I sue him for a million dollars now?

I'm fine if the FAA sees fit to punish AS or Menzies, I'm not saying AS shouldn't be in some trouble, but this lawsuit - like most - is bogus.

I've been around long enough to know that most people bitch and complain about lawyers until something happens to them. Then suddenly they seem to have a whole new view of the legal system and its purpose. Ever notice that?

I've been around long enough to know that most people bitch and complain about lawyers until something happens to them. Then suddenly they seem to have a whole new view of the legal system and its purpose. Ever notice that?

I've absolutely noticed that. Something happens and suddenly they go "Wow! Now I can file suit and become independently wealthy!!"

I can't say the money didn't tempt me when last year I slipped on icy stairs that my landlord was supposed to have had shoveled and didn't get shoveled - and I broke my right hand. Heck, I'm pretty lucky I didn't break my neck considering the way I fell (my hand got broken because of the way I used it and my arm to keep me from landing straight on my neck/back) Probably could have sued him for a good bit of cash. But he/his insurance offered to pay my medical bills and any lost wages (without my even asking) which I thought was fair. Somehow I didn't think becoming independently wealthy because I fell down some stairs (but am fine now) was the right thing to do.

It sounds like you think the "legal system and it's purpose" is to smack money out of people every time something remotely bad happens, even if it does no long term damage to the person. Am I misunderstanding?

I wouldn't comment on this being frivolous. There was an extreme degree of negligence on the defendents' end in this case; not like some stupid passenger DVT cases like we've seen in the past. I do doubt the passengers involved will become wealthy over it; the lawyers might though

What are you talking about? Some of the people on that flight suffered permanent hearing loss and/or permanent damage to their ear drums. I don't know if you are familiar with ear damage, but it can manifest itself as fainting spells and all kinds of other things that can seriously affect someone's life

Quoting N1120A (Reply 9):What are you talking about? Some of the people on that flight suffered permanent hearing loss and/or permanent damage to their ear drums. I don't know if you are familiar with ear damage, but it can manifest itself as fainting spells and all kinds of other things that can seriously affect someone's life

If you are correct about this, then I would tend to side with you on this one. However the article stated: "Passengers say they had injuries that include eardrum damage and hearing loss. " I'm keying in on the word HAD, as opposed to it saying HAVE. Eardrum damage and hearing loss are not in all cases permanent conditions and this article leads me to believe such is the case here. But again, if you are right that damage is permanent for these passengers (which I personally doubt), then I agree with you.

They'll settle out of court, and the flying public will pay for it through increased airline ticket prices. more so, the communities served by Alaska Airlines without airline competition. Geeze, now my twenty one day advance purchase super saver fare to SEA will increase from $450.00 to $600.00

Quoting GentFromAlaska (Reply 12):Geeze, now my twenty one day advance purchase super saver fare to SEA will increase from $450.00 to $600.00

That ANC-SEA fare hasn't budged upward from the $350 to $450 range in the entire time I've worked for Alaska Airlines - FOURTEEN YEARS.

What does that tell you, Gent? Perhaps it's time that fare went up a bit, don'tcha think? Costs for fuel, employee benefits, aircraft leases and so forth certainly haven't stayed flat during that time...

Anyway, Menzies isn't perfect, not by a long shot - but neither were the RSSA contract ramp group either. They also had problems, up to and including striking aircraft with ground equipment.

AS is going through some teething problems with Menzies, yes - but things ARE getting better, despite the media scrutiny.

"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan

Quoting EA COAS (Reply 13):That ANC-SEA fare hasn't budged upward from the $350 to $450 range in the entire time I've worked for Alaska Airlines - FOURTEEN YEARS

EACOAS, my point exactly, ANC has airline competition. I remember not so many years ago (pre $68.00 dollar a barrel oil) I could fly JNU-SEA for $299.00 - $318.00 on a fourteen or twenty one day advance purchase super saver fare. I also use to tap the three day advance purchase "flight specific" fares AS use to offer. These days that same $299.00 ticket cost in the neighborhood of $450.00, Even with oil costing $68.00 a barrel (not considering any hedges) the AVGAS prices do not justify $150.00 increase.

Have other markets similiar in size outside of Alaska seen the same substanual increase. I doubt it. I'm totally in agreement with you, any airline should be able to pass higher cost to their pax. That's business! I do feel those cost should spread across all markets equitable. Not just on the backs of a few. Did the fares in the State of Alaska go down when Alaska replaced the fuel guzzling MD-80's with the 737s, No. Alaska Airlines use to tell us we pay more because of the weather delays getting into and out of JNU. Did prices go down after the GPS/RNP technology was paid for, No. Although flight delays still occur, they are rare even in Juneau. Are other cities like SFO and DCA which now use GPS/RNP technology paying their share with higher ticket prices? I doubt it.

I also feel AS should offer their fare specials to all cities. Time and time again most Alaska cities which do not have competition are forgot about. I invite you to look at the current Alaska Airline "Sale Fares To Warm You Up" currently offered on the website. If you notice ANC is the only Alaska city I see which is offered in the sale. Other cities besides ANC want to warm up too.

Doing a little playing about on the AS web site, $445 before taxes and fees, JNU-SEA . . . . $227 before taxes and fees JNU-SIT. That's only literally 20-30 minutes in the air! Scheduled for 50 minutes of course.

Where AS has competition in Alaska, it is generous with discounts and fare matching. Where it does not, it beats us up . . . .

MarkAir put the challenge to them in the early 1990s - too bad Neal Berdt was such an idiot - and you saw the fares between ANC-JNU drop. You saw the fare between ANC and BET, OTZ, OME, SCC all drop. As soon as MarkAir was done and gone . . . within a week, the fare ANC-JNU went up over $100.

I know you and I have had this conversation before. I don't expect to fly for free . . . shoot, I know it costs $$$, but neither do I expect to be gouged by my "hometown airline" (based in Seattle ).

Quoting KabAir (Reply 11):Eardrum damage and hearing loss are not in all cases permanent conditions and this article leads me to believe such is the case here. But again, if you are right that damage is permanent for these passengers (which I personally doubt), then I agree with you.

Indeed. However, if a passenger sustains a traumatic perforation of the tympanum, which in some cases will not heal spontaneously, who is liable for the hospitalisation-and operating theatre costs when a tympanoplasty has to be performed? It does not matter whether the damage is temporary, it is a case of costs and who is to be held responsible for that.

Also, if someone sustained sensory-neural hearing loss due to the incident, it is permanent of nature and nothing can be done to repair that hearing loss. Is that person not entitled to compensation? I realise that you are doubtful, but we can not exclude permanent hearing loss as we do not have all the facts available to us.

Rgds

SA7700

When you are doing stuff that nobody has done before, there is no manual – Kevin McCloud (Grand Designs)

Quoting KabAir (Reply 6):It sounds like you think the "legal system and it's purpose" is to smack money out of people every time something remotely bad happens, even if it does no long term damage to the person. Am I misunderstanding?

I'm not sure where you got that from my short post. I just think a few frivolous lawsuits are the price we pay to have the courts on our side when we actually need them. It's a double-edged sword when we restrict who can be sued and for how much. If we take tort reform too far (as most tort reform measures do IMO), we just end up screwing ourselves in the end.

When multinational corporations make billions in profits each year, capped damage awards simply become the cost of doing business and the will of the courts becomes almost irrelevant. Besides, the vast majority of frivolous lawsuits I've heard of were in actuality very different from the word-of-mouth version and in many cases were simply fabricated from the ground up.

You know, it was about 9 months ago when we beat this dead horse.....some of us predicted nothing but trouble, others predicted that Alaska's rent-a-rampers would get their act together in short order.

I can understand outsourcing the work when you have a few flights a day(one or two) but what AS did, and it was at a hub no less, was totally wrong. In the long run the company will loose. Once you outsource the work to an airport service company whether it be ticketing or ramp or both the customer looses since the service company is all about making money and not customer service. I guarantee you delays out of SEA will climb as well as lost luggage.

Quoting RAMPRAT980 (Reply 64):
I guarantee you delays out of SEA will climb as well as lost luggage.

I totally disagree,Yes short term there will be problems with the ramp in SEA.
After a week or so things will get back to normal. The on time departures and lost bag rate in SEA were nothing to be proud of anyway. This change will do nothing to fix the problem or to make it worse.The ones who determine manpower and scheduling on the ramp hold the burden for this. Weather it is Ogden/Menzie's or AS rampers this challenge will be on going.

I am also tired of the point that AS management screwed there former workers. Everyone to AS knew 2 years ago that they wanted to outsource the ramp in Seattle. AS told the Union that and also said for a certain amount of consession they would keep the ramp jobs in Seattle. Fuel prices then skyrocketed and AS went back to the union and told them they needed more consessions.

IMO the Union thought that AS was bluffing. In the end they were not, and the rampers in SEA paid the price for there unions incompadence (sp?).
There are no winners here.

I have heard there are a lot of former rampers applying to work at the contract co. I just wish ALL the rampers good luck.

>> I am also tired of the point that AS management screwed there former workers. Everyone to AS knew 2 years ago that they wanted to outsource the ramp in Seattle. <<

One analogy to Alaska wanting to outsource the ramp: People in hell want ice water, too.

Here's the problem.

Over the years Alaska hired people to work on the ramp. They had a contract with those people (the rampers). They (management) had a moral obligation to bargain with them in good faith.

To me, it's like the doctor...who marries the plain but goof hearted RN to put him through med school and his residency....but as soon as he gets into his lucratvie private practice he ditches Mrs Faithful at the divorce court and shacks up with a young, pretty trophy wife.

Let's say Alaska had said "we want to outsource ramp operation in Seattle." It would seem appropriate for them to offer those ramp personnel positions elsewhere within the Alaska system. But no - all management did was bargain in bad faith, and then when the contract was expired, they toss those guys in the dumpster.

Qxq - you try to put a positive spin on this, but there is nothing at all positive about what the Alaska management did. It was wrong, plain and simple. For God's sakes - Seattle is their hub and biggest station, I would imagine. I cannot for the life of me understand why an airline would cede control of its ramp operations at its largest station to a third party over which it can exercise negligible control.

As far as ex-Alaska rampers going to work for the new company, that may be true. People will go to great lengths and swallow an awful lot of pride to make sure mom and the kids have a home, clothes on their backs, and food in their bellies. However---I would ask you just how wonderful an attitude towards Alaska operations those ex-Alaska folks working for the rent-a-ramper firm are going to have?

If bags fall off the cart and get squashed on the way to the terminal, it's no big deal.

If the bags don't make the flight, it's no big deal.

If it takes 90 minutes to get bags from the plane to the baggage claim it is no big deal.

Quoting TxAgKuwait (Reply 61):
It is little solace to Alaska's former Seattle rampers who got the shaft, but what goes around usually comes around. I am sure the company's management is high fiving, congratulating each other on having stuck it to labor. Heck, they may even reward themselves with a juicy bonus for having saved the company so much money.

What goes around invariably comes around. The only variables are when, in what form, and to what extent? Be sure that the $13 million Alaska will allegedly save by management's treachery (followed by pathetic disingenuous spin in Bill Ayer's explanation for their actions) will be "pissed away" within a very short time. What I can't say is when and how, but what I can say with certitude is that this is how the world functions, whether people choose to believe it or whether they choose to live in denial of a transcendant principle over which they do not have control.

There are many ways that what Alaska's management has caused to go around might come around. It may well be very subtle and not directly connected, such as perhaps the excessive largess of their frequent freeloader (...I mean flyer) program bilking Alaska for more than $13 million (above what it might have). Which would be a case of Alaska raping its rampers, but being raped for even more than they allegedly saved by the high-maintenance, high-cost, low-yield, subculture of freeloader customers that Alaska's FF, marketing, pricing, and customer relations departments have been allowed to create, with no accountability for the true costs of their actions. In fact, all it would take for the "savings" of Alaska manegement's treachery to disappear altogether within one year is $1.00 per passenger carried; an average amount that can easily be "pissed away" many times over by the quid pro non inclinations of the aforementioned departments; just another possible way that what goes around will come around. It could also be a combination of factors that will cause the $13 million in "savings" to go bye-bye within a year; it will probably be much sooner and the amount that will mysteriously vanish will probably be even higher -- that is the way in which "what goes around comes around" seems to work.

Quoting TxAgKuwait (Reply 70):
If bags fall off the cart and get squashed on the way to the terminal, it's no big deal.

If the bags don't make the flight, it's no big deal.

If it takes 90 minutes to get bags from the plane to the baggage claim it is no big deal.

My point is that this was happening anyway.....As I have stated in the past the us vs. Them attitude the union's fuels causes hard feelings on both sides. Even before the contract came up for negation plenty of rampers felt this way. I am not saying that they did not have a reason to feel this way. I am not saying that for MOST,not all but MOST rampers did not care about AS.They only cared about a pay check and how to get out of doing anything more than the bare minimums that they could get away with.

Qxq writes in: >> As I have stated in the past the us vs. Them attitude the union's fuels causes hard feelings on both sides. Even before the contract came up for negation plenty of rampers felt this way. I am not saying that they did not have a reason to feel this way. I am not saying that for MOST,not all but MOST rampers did not care about AS.They only cared about a pay check and how to get out of doing anything more than the bare minimums that they could get away with. <<

So, Alaska's management was unable or unwilling to work with labor, preferring instead to maintain an adversarial relationship.

The management at Alaska was unable to sufficiently motivate their own employees to do things the right way, to build a cohesive unit capable of competing effectively with other airlines.

If they thought getting their own employees to do their jobs properly was tough...and were willing to basically just give up trying.....how easy do you suppose it is going to be for them to get somebody else's employees to do a good job....especially when you have chopped wages and pared benefits and you are doing it in a high cost of living kind of place.

Perhaps I am of an older school of thought.....but if I am running an airline I don't cede control over any more of my operation than I have to. I might outsource some maintenance....since heavy checks have to have a lot of test equipment and special tools and I really don't want the necessary capital investment....but you can bet that even on that I have some of MY own folks scrutinizing the work and doing some heavy duty QA/QC.

I don't move my res to India or the Philippines.

I don't let my bags get handled by Rent-A-Ramper.

My folks at the ticket counter are not from Kelly Girl.

Unfortunately, there is just no really adequate way to spin this that makes the Alaska Air management look like anything but a bunch of union busting scoundrels. Like I said, I'm not Mister "Look For The Union Label" but fair is fair. You have employees who have invested a chunk of their working life serving your firm, you don't rip off their heads and crap down their necks and send them on down the road to save a few bucks.

I think one of the previous posters hit it on the head...whatever money Alaska saves through this will be pissed away elsewhere in short order.

Quoting TxAgKuwait (Reply 18):Let's say Alaska had said "we want to outsource ramp operation in Seattle." It would seem appropriate for them to offer those ramp personnel positions elsewhere within the Alaska system. But no - all management did was bargain in bad faith, and then when the contract was expired, they toss those guys in the dumpster.

FWIW, while I still don't entirely agree with the idea behind outsourcing the ramp, the affected rampers DID have the option to bump into other stations where union rampers worked. These were all in the state of Alaska though, and not many took that option.

No one was "tossed in the dumpster," and while they may not have wanted to part ways with the company, they were given VERY generous severance packages that for many senior rampers equaled nearly a full year's pay, plus medical and even limited flight benefits.

"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 19):the affected rampers DID have the option to bump into other stations where union rampers worked. These were all in the state of Alaska though, and not many took that option.

No one was "tossed in the dumpster,"

No they where just given the choice of moving 1200 miles away, for the same pay (less then AK) or losing their jobs....

I think you meant to say, "god bless blood sucking americans that keep stupid lawyers in business." Yes, that is what you meant to say. (In other words, 2 things: plaintiffs hire lawyers, not the other way around, and second, most of the suits you would call frivolous are taken up by stupid lawyers.)

Quoting Midway2AirTran (Reply 7):I do doubt the passengers involved will become wealthy over it; the lawyers might though

Another common misconception. Plaintiffs' lawyers' takes are usually capped at 1/3. That means that the plaintiffs get twice as much as the lawyer, at least. This isn't a class action.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 9):Some of the people on that flight suffered permanent hearing loss and/or permanent damage to their ear drums. I don't know if you are familiar with ear damage, but it can manifest itself as fainting spells and all kinds of other things that can seriously affect someone's life

Yup, N1120A is right. If this is the case, those same lawyers that are being bashed are actually the lawyers that are fighting to make these plaintiffs whole.

Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL